Spotify
Posted by: Voltaire on 14 June 2009
Ok, so maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake but, how does Spotify make any money? I mean, their business model just doesn't have any longevity.
Even if a free user is subjected to adverts (which they ignore which advertisers know which means that advertisers will not pay top rates), how can the revenue generated cover the PRS royalties (each time you listen to a song or album the creator must get paid) plus server space, web time, admin, accounts, advertising etc.,?
Even the £10 monthly fee can't possibly cover the costs of providing that much music no matter how many members you have?
Please enlighten me.
Gordon
Even if a free user is subjected to adverts (which they ignore which advertisers know which means that advertisers will not pay top rates), how can the revenue generated cover the PRS royalties (each time you listen to a song or album the creator must get paid) plus server space, web time, admin, accounts, advertising etc.,?
Even the £10 monthly fee can't possibly cover the costs of providing that much music no matter how many members you have?
Please enlighten me.
Gordon
Posted on: 22 June 2009 by Simon Drake
the reason it works for Spotify is that labels opt in to receive a % of advertising and subscription revenues proportionate to the playcount. My understanding is that the mechanical royalty model for subscription services (use of songwriting copyright) is also generated in a similar way.
It is the same with a subscription service like eMusic (anyone use that? I hear it is bigger in the US). Revenue is split based on popularity of download NOT royalty per download. For a Naim Label track that means 2p per song (average) as opposed to 39p per song for iTunes (makes iTunes look good!).
Going back to my original point, simply it is hard to pay for recording and marketing if a whole album is sold for 20p! If your artist is only getting 10p of that 20p...they'd probably give up and get a 9 to 5 (unless you are a major artist).
You guys are right, the 7digital tie up should help (is what we7 already do but that is integrated) and actually I've found using 7digital quite easy myself. Shame they are MP3s. I've met with 7digital before about their services. Understandably they admit that getting Majors to license anything near CD quality is nigh on impossible.
But for smaller outfits (and we've done this with www.naimlabel.com) entrusting masters to our customers (DRM free) is key to survival right now!
I think we buying few have trouble understanding how people can see no value and music and hence feel no guilt, but they are unfortunately the majority! And now we've given them a taste of how easy copyright theft is it is going to be hard to change their ways!
It is the same with a subscription service like eMusic (anyone use that? I hear it is bigger in the US). Revenue is split based on popularity of download NOT royalty per download. For a Naim Label track that means 2p per song (average) as opposed to 39p per song for iTunes (makes iTunes look good!).
Going back to my original point, simply it is hard to pay for recording and marketing if a whole album is sold for 20p! If your artist is only getting 10p of that 20p...they'd probably give up and get a 9 to 5 (unless you are a major artist).
You guys are right, the 7digital tie up should help (is what we7 already do but that is integrated) and actually I've found using 7digital quite easy myself. Shame they are MP3s. I've met with 7digital before about their services. Understandably they admit that getting Majors to license anything near CD quality is nigh on impossible.
But for smaller outfits (and we've done this with www.naimlabel.com) entrusting masters to our customers (DRM free) is key to survival right now!
I think we buying few have trouble understanding how people can see no value and music and hence feel no guilt, but they are unfortunately the majority! And now we've given them a taste of how easy copyright theft is it is going to be hard to change their ways!

Posted on: 22 June 2009 by Simon Drake
interesting that to the untrained eye/ear 320kbps MP3 is considered 'CD quality'.
http://www.marketingweek.co.uk...e#&nl=BN&ln=22060906
Admittedly there are some encoders that make the difference between 320kbps and 16/44.1 wav more slight. But I guess it is more important to some users than others (dependent on habits).
Safe to say tho, that marketing 320kbps as CD quality could damage the independents who sell 16bit FLAC, WAV or other.
As a Spotify user myself, streamed 320kbps is great news and a superb quickfix. With a Label hat on, I am still undecided! :S
I wonder whether Spotify's press release marketed the change as CD quality (very crued) or whether this is something that journalists have adopted themselves (very ill informed) ?
http://www.marketingweek.co.uk...e#&nl=BN&ln=22060906
Admittedly there are some encoders that make the difference between 320kbps and 16/44.1 wav more slight. But I guess it is more important to some users than others (dependent on habits).
Safe to say tho, that marketing 320kbps as CD quality could damage the independents who sell 16bit FLAC, WAV or other.
As a Spotify user myself, streamed 320kbps is great news and a superb quickfix. With a Label hat on, I am still undecided! :S
I wonder whether Spotify's press release marketed the change as CD quality (very crued) or whether this is something that journalists have adopted themselves (very ill informed) ?
Posted on: 22 June 2009 by nap-ster
iTunes market 256 as CD quality.
Posted on: 23 June 2009 by Simon Drake
sick! got any links to support that?
Posted on: 26 June 2009 by Simon Drake
Posted on: 26 June 2009 by Voltaire
Simon, does it make a difference that Spotify stream Ogg Vorbis q9 at 320 kb/s, not mp3?
Gordon
Gordon
quote:Admittedly there are some encoders that make the difference between 320kbps and 16/44.1 wav more slight.
Posted on: 26 June 2009 by nap-ster
quote:Originally posted by Simon Drake:
sick! got any links to support that?
http://www.apple.com/itunes/whatsnew/
OK not "CD quality" but "High quality" ahem.
Posted on: 29 June 2009 by Simon Drake
good encoder. but you can't argue with the loss of noughts and ones between mp3 and cd. MP3s are not lossless. As a quick fix, think all news is good news on the improving encode methods or increasing quality (as long as they don't pretend it is Highest of the High Quality - that really bugs me!)
as an aside, the technology for MP3 HD has been developed. Could be a mainstream competitor to Apple Lossless...could tip the balance, so who knows what'll happen. We'll see which the creators go in licensing it!
as an aside, the technology for MP3 HD has been developed. Could be a mainstream competitor to Apple Lossless...could tip the balance, so who knows what'll happen. We'll see which the creators go in licensing it!
Posted on: 30 June 2009 by Trilobyte
I think that their business plan is to get people used to using it, then up the frequency of ads until people get so hacked off with ads that they pay for the premium service. I seem to remember that Sky started with a free film service and then started to charge.
Posted on: 01 July 2009 by nap-ster
I've noticed the increasing frequency of ads recently.
Posted on: 01 July 2009 by BigH47
quote:Originally posted by nap-ster:
I've noticed the increasing frequency of ads recently.
Hear hear!
Posted on: 01 July 2009 by Bob McC
quote:Originally posted by nap-ster:
I've noticed the increasing frequency of ads recently.
I thought I was imagining it!
Posted on: 01 July 2009 by Richwleeds
True
I've been working at home today - not in the garden honest - and had spotify on all day
Yes there is an increasing frequency of adverts - every 10 mins rather than 20
Eclectic mix today which was fun - Stephen Still, SLF, Dinosaur Jr, Scritti politti...
I've been working at home today - not in the garden honest - and had spotify on all day
Yes there is an increasing frequency of adverts - every 10 mins rather than 20
Eclectic mix today which was fun - Stephen Still, SLF, Dinosaur Jr, Scritti politti...
Posted on: 05 July 2009 by Voltaire
I really think that Spotify is great, sincere thanks to Lontano for getting me involved.
I have paid the £10 a month to get rid of the adverts and await improved sound quality with bated breath.
One to point to note though is the streaming process that Spotify uses. They proudly advertised that they had solved streaming issues. They solved streaming issues by dumping the content onto your hard drive then playing delayed content from that location and then deleting the HDD dump shortly after. The default is set to use 10gb of your HDD. This means that if you use Spotify a lot as I now do, your HDD is taking a real pounding. On my main computer that isn't a problem but on my laptop...
I have paid the £10 a month to get rid of the adverts and await improved sound quality with bated breath.
One to point to note though is the streaming process that Spotify uses. They proudly advertised that they had solved streaming issues. They solved streaming issues by dumping the content onto your hard drive then playing delayed content from that location and then deleting the HDD dump shortly after. The default is set to use 10gb of your HDD. This means that if you use Spotify a lot as I now do, your HDD is taking a real pounding. On my main computer that isn't a problem but on my laptop...

Posted on: 16 July 2009 by Skip
You guys get all the cool stuff. First it was the Abarth, then the BMW diesel. Not to mention the current season of Top Gear. And now spotify.
http://www.slate.com/id/2223018/
http://www.slate.com/id/2223018/